Show Me, Tell Me, Encourage Me: The Effect of Different Forms of Feedback on Resistance Training Performance

Weakley, Jonathon; Wilson, Kyle M.; Till, Kevin; Banyard, Harry G.; Dyson, J.; Phibbs, Padraic J.; Read, Dale B.; Jones, Ben

doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002887

Cited by 49 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this method limits exercise choice and prevents the use of peak velocity. Similarly, the analysis of videos after the termination of a set also prevents immediate bio-feedback that has shown to be advantageous during resistance training [ 5 ]. The wearable nature of some IMUs allows for greater flexibility of usage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strong inverse linear relationships between load and velocity exist across many resistance-based exercises [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. The facilitation and monitoring of training prescriptions, fatigue management, daily strength estimations, and motivation have all been proposed as benefits to implementing velocity-based measures in to practice [ 3 , 4 , 5 ]. However, the reliability and validity of some technologies such as linear position transducers (LPT), inertial measurement units (IMU), and smartphone applications designed to measure barbell velocity and facilitate the above still need further clarification in certain exercises.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Reliability and Validity of Current Technologies for Measuring Barbell Velocity in the Free-Weight Back Squat and Power Clean

Thompson

Rogerson

Dorrell

et al. 2020

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the inter-day and intra-device reliability, and criterion validity of six devices for measuring barbell velocity in the free-weight back squat and power clean. In total, 10 competitive weightlifters completed an initial one repetition maximum (1RM) assessment followed by three load-velocity profiles (40–100% 1RM) in both exercises on four separate occasions. Mean and peak velocity was measured simultaneously on each device and compared to 3D motion capture for all repetitions. Reliability was assessed via coefficient of variation (CV) and typical error (TE). Least products regression (LPR) (R2) and limits of agreement (LOA) assessed the validity of the devices. The Gymaware was the most reliable for both exercises (CV < 10%; TE < 0.11 m·s−1, except 100% 1RM (mean velocity) and 90‒100% 1RM (peak velocity)), with MyLift and PUSH following a similar trend. Poorer reliability was observed for Beast Sensor and Bar Sensei (CV = 5.1–119.9%; TE = 0.08–0.48 m·s−1). The Gymaware was the most valid device, with small systematic bias and no proportional or fixed bias evident across both exercises (R2 > 0.42–0.99 LOA = −0.03–0.03 m·s−1). Comparable validity data was observed for MyLift in the back squat. Both PUSH devices produced some fixed and proportional bias, with Beast Sensor and Bar Sensei being the least valid devices across both exercises (R2 > 0.00–0.96, LOA = −0.36–0.46 m·s−1). Linear position transducers and smartphone applications could be used to obtain velocity-based data, with inertial measurement units demonstrating poorer reliability and validity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Reliability and Validity of Current Technologies for Measuring Barbell Velocity in the Free-Weight Back Squat and Power Clean

Thompson

Rogerson

Dorrell

et al. 2020

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the iLOAD ® app allows practitioners to obtain real-time accurate measures of the total work performed during a RT session. This augmented feedback may help to improve both physical performance (Weakley et al, in press) and psychological traits (Wilson et al, 2017) in athletes whilst training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of the iLOAD® app for resistance training monitoring

Sá

Medeiros²,

Ferreira³

et al. 2019

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed (I) to assess the inter-rater agreement for measuring the mean velocity (MV) of the barbell with the iLOAD® app, and (II) to compare the magnitude of the MV and total work of a training session between the iLOAD® app and a linear encoder (reference method). Method Sixteen young healthy individuals (four women and 12 men) were tested in two sessions separated by 48 h. The 10 repetition maximum (RM) load was determined in the first testing session in the half squat exercise. The second testing session consisted of 3 sets of 10 repetitions during the half squat exercise performed against the 10RM load. Both the iLOAD® app and a linear encoder were used to calculate the MV and total work of each training set. MV was recorded with the iLOAD® app by two independent researchers to evaluate the inter-rater agreement. Results Trivial differences and nearly perfect correlations were observed between raters for the MV values collected under individual sets (effect size [ES] ≤ 0.02, r ≥ 0.987), as well as for the whole training session (ES = 0.01, r = 0.997). Trivial-small differences and nearly perfect correlations were observed between the iLOAD® app and the linear encoder (Chronojump, Barcelona, Spain) for MV (EV ≤ 0.25, r ≥ 0.903) and total work (ES ≤ 0.05, r ≥ 0.973). Bland-Altman plots did not reveal heteroscedasticity of the errors between the iLOAD® app and the linear encoder for MV (r2 = 0.010) and total work (r2 < 0.001). Conclusions iLOAD® is a valid smartphone app which can provide real-time feedback of the MV and total work completed in a set of multiple repetitions in the half squat exercise.

show abstract

“…For example, old subjects required eight to nine sessions to have consistency in the measurement of the 1RM during the bilateral concentric knee extension exercise (Ploutz-Snyder & Giamis, 2001). The monitoring of movement velocity has been proposed as an alternative to prescribe and quantify the training load during resistance training (Jovanovic & Flanagan, 2014; Mann, Ivey & Sayers, 2015; Balsalobre-Fernández et al, 2018) as well as to increase motivation during training (Wilson et al, 2017; Weakley et al, 2018). One of the main applications of velocity-based resistance training is the use of movement velocity to estimate the 1RM (Banyard, Nosaka & Haff, 2017; García-Ramos et al, 2018a; Perez-Castilla et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Movement velocity can be used to estimate the relative load during the bench press and leg press exercises in older women

Marcos-Pardo

González-Hernández

García-Ramos

et al. 2019

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMovement velocity has been proposed as an effective tool to prescribe the load during resistance training in young healthy adults. This study aimed to elucidate whether movement velocity could also be used to estimate the relative load (i.e., % of the one-repetition maximum (1RM)) in older women.MethodsA total of 22 older women (age = 68.2 ± 3.6 years, bench press 1RM = 22.3 ± 4.7 kg, leg press 1RM = 114.6 ± 15.9 kg) performed an incremental loading test during the free-weight bench press and the leg press exercises on two separate sessions. The mean velocity (MV) was collected with a linear position transducer.ResultsA strong linear relationship between MV and the relative load was observed for the bench press (%1RM = −130.4 MV + 119.3;r2= 0.827, standard error of the estimate (SEE) = 6.10%1RM,p< 0.001) and leg press exercises (%1RM = −158.3 MV + 131.4;r2= 0.913, SEE = 5.63%1RM,p< 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the bench press and leg press exercises for the MV attained against light-medium relative loads (≤70%1RM), while the MV associated with heavy loads (≥80%1RM) was significantly higher for the leg press.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the monitoring of MV could be useful to prescribe the loads during resistance training in older women. However, it should be noted that the MV associated with a given %1RM is significantly lower in older women compared to young healthy individuals.

show abstract

Show Me, Tell Me, Encourage Me: The Effect of Different Forms of Feedback on Resistance Training Performance

Cited by 49 publications

References 28 publications

The Reliability and Validity of Current Technologies for Measuring Barbell Velocity in the Free-Weight Back Squat and Power Clean

The Reliability and Validity of Current Technologies for Measuring Barbell Velocity in the Free-Weight Back Squat and Power Clean

Validity of the iLOAD® app for resistance training monitoring

Movement velocity can be used to estimate the relative load during the bench press and leg press exercises in older women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About